Get travel timeline

Does the description disclose side effects, auth requirements, rate limits, or destructive behavior?

Annotations already declare readOnlyHint, idempotentHint and non-destructive behavior, so the description's added value is the access prerequisites (paid Business subscription plus export approval) and the coverage limitation (only connected users who share trips). That is meaningful behavioral context beyond the structured fields, though pagination and rate-limit behavior are left to the schema.

Agents need to know what a tool does to the world before calling it. Descriptions should go beyond structured annotations to explain consequences.

Is the description appropriately sized, front-loaded, and free of redundancy?

Front-loads the core purpose and scoping, then qualifications. The parenthetical enumeration of ten reservation types is bulky but earns its place by pre-empting type questions. Two sentences, no filler.

Shorter descriptions cost fewer tokens and are easier for agents to parse. Every sentence should earn its place.

Given the tool's complexity, does the description cover enough for an agent to succeed on first attempt?

Covers purpose, default window, ordering, coverage limits and subscription prerequisites for a 7-parameter tool with no output schema. Return shape is partly covered by the detail enum in the schema; overall the agent has enough to call it correctly, with only pagination semantics unaddressed.

Complex tools with many parameters or behaviors need more documentation. Simple tools need less. This dimension scales expectations accordingly.

Does the description clarify parameter syntax, constraints, interactions, or defaults beyond what the schema provides?

Schema description coverage is 100%, so every parameter is already documented, giving a baseline of 3. The description restates the default window and type list rather than adding syntax or format detail beyond what the schema provides, so it neither clarifies nor detracts.

Input schemas describe structure but not intent. Descriptions should explain non-obvious parameter relationships and valid value ranges.

Does the description clearly state what the tool does and how it differs from similar tools?

States a specific verb and resource ('Lists trips from AwardWallet's travel timeline'), enumerates the covered reservation types, and specifies ordering ('sorted by start date') and the default date window. An agent can distinguish it from list_people or list_loyalty_accounts without opening the schema.

Agents choose between tools based on descriptions. A clear purpose with a specific verb and resource helps agents select the right tool.

Does the description explain when to use this tool, when not to, or what alternatives exist?

Gives concrete activation conditions: only connected users who share trips are covered, and a paid Business subscription with timeline export approval is required. It also implies how to use userId ('from list_people', omit to combine everyone). It stops short of naming alternate tools for overlapping needs, so it falls just shy of a 5.

Agents often have multiple tools that could apply. Explicit usage guidance like "use X instead of Y when Z" prevents misuse.